What advantages running ported midbass if you are running a sub? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20th May 2008, 12:46 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ga
Default What advantages running ported midbass if you are running a sub?

What advantages running ported midbass if you are running a sub too? Is there an increase in sensitivty?

I have read where people tune to lets say 80 and set the crossover at 80. Does this mke sense. ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2008, 01:10 PM   #2
gni is offline gni  United States
diyAudio Member
gni's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
It can keep the response of the mid driver smoother. . . usually
the port will split the resonant peak into two smaller
peaks keeping the response smoother and gives the driver
a better roll-off at the bottom end. . .

The best type of sub + main speaker systems have the mains that
can produce the low frequencies well. . .they usually have a smoother
roll-off and sound more natural. . .the mains are still going to be
getting some of the frequencies due to the cross-over slope being
12 dB/Oct or 18 dB/oct or 24 dB/oct or higher but it is still not
an infinite brick wall that separates the two. . .both the sub and
the mains need to be able to produce the frequencies two or
three octaves beyond the crossover point. . .
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2008, 02:20 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
gtforme00's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2004
A ported alignment will create a 18db/oct (3rd order) acoustic filter below the tuning frequency, a sealed enclosure will create a 12db/oct (2nd order) acoustic filter below the tuning frequency. Either of these can be used along with electric filters set at or near the tuning frequency to create a steeper effective acoustic filter.

In my personal experience, I find it easier to blend a sealed enclosure with a subwoofer.

There are two other advantages of a sealed enclosure that may or may not be important to you.

1. They are usually physically smaller.
2. If you choose not to run a high pass filter to the mains (not recommended), they provide better protection against large excursions at low frequencies. A ported box does not substantially load the woofer below the tuning frequency and will provide little protection against over excursion of the woofers.

  Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2008, 02:34 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canandaigua, NY USA
I run an open baffle mid bass, but I think sealed is the easiest solution. A ported system will have phase shifts that make the crossover design far more difficult.
I may be barking up the wrong tree, but at least I'm barking!
  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
F2 running hot(how hot is hot?) Aron Pass Labs 10 13th February 2009 03:42 PM
My first ever DIY Amp up and Running ! Ebola Class D 3 12th December 2006 09:49 AM
Running-in the UCD 180... ptwining Class D 10 12th August 2006 05:19 AM
New Ono up and running Ed Robinson Pass Labs 13 14th June 2003 06:45 PM
p3a up and running :) Jean Solid State 10 1st December 2002 02:07 AM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:50 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2